Access to Energy
Access to Energy articles about the great environmental benefits of carbon dioxide release into the atmosphere (see, for examples, AtE 21-3 pp 2-3 and AtE 21-4 pp 2-3) prompted one reader to remark, however, that these were the strongest arguments that he had seen favoring the increased burning of coal, oil, and natural gas over nuclear power.
From Oak Ridge National Laboratory, comes another "pro-coal'' argument. Alex Gabbard in the
Oak Ridge National Laboratory Review, November (1993) pp 25-32 as reviewed in Science News, Octo-ber 1, (1994) p 223 estimates that 1982 U. S. atmospheric release of radioactive components of coal ash included 800 tons of uranium and 2000 tons of thorium. World-wide release from coal was 3,600 tons of uranium (with 26 tons of uranium-235) and 9,000 tons of thorium.Gabbard calculates that radioactive materials in coal ash from U. S. coal-fired power plants exceed the entire radioactive fuel consumption
by U.S. nuclear power plants - and that radiation exposure of the U.S. population from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear plants.Now, of course, the politically correct interpretation of release of carbon dioxide and radioactivity by the coal power industry is that nuclear power is safer and cleaner. Hormesis has shown, however, that current levels of background radiation in most areas of the United States are
below the levels consistent with optimum human health. (See AtE 21-4 p 4, 21-8 p 4, 22-2 p 3, and the referenced articles by T. D. Luckey, Bernard Cohen, and their colleagues.) The concomitant benefits to the health of world vegetation from carbon dioxide release are also documented in thousands of experimental studies. See, for example, "Flower Power, Rising Carbon Dioxide is Great for Plants'' by Sylvan H. Wittwer in Policy Review, fall (1992) pp 4-9 in addition to the work of Sherwood Idso and his colleagues described in previous AtE articles as referenced above.Gabbard also discusses the mercury, arsenic, and lead content of coal ash. It may be that the public health benefits of scrubbing certain chemicals out of coal ash is great enough to justify the cost. Many precautions are sensible. Low level radiation is safe, but it would be foolish to argue against reactor containment buildings on this basis.
Human health and quality of life will benefit enormously from the rapid development of inexpensive, widely available electrical energy. This includes primarily nuclear, coal, and natural gas generation in the United States (with the future addition of sources such as solar power in instances where cost and less intense usages make these cost-effective). Politically correct nonscience has impeded this development, especially in the case of nuclear power. Carbon dioxide and moderate radioactive isotope release are unexpected benefits in this enterprise.
As these forms of energy compete in the market place, it is absolutely essential that they compete on the basis of truth. It is very counterproductive for them to compete on the basis of politically correct myths such as carbon dioxide "pollution'' and radiation fear. The ultimate winners in a competition based upon enviro falsehoods would be the anti-technology enemies of all power generation industries.
This danger is especially great because, at the present time, the United States is afflicted with an unusually serious case of fascism wherein competing industries lobby government in favor of laws and regulations that will hinder their competition.
|
|
Vol. 22, No. 3
Newsletter: Access to Energy Newsletter Archive Volume: Issues Issue/No.: Vol. 22, No. 3 Date: November 01, 1994 02:33 PM Title: Consensus
Copyright © 2004 - Access to Energy Newsletter Archive
|